Guttmacher estimates that just over 54% of pregnancies in Uganda are unintended, and state that “The high level of unintended pregnancy and the gap between actual and desired fertility in Uganda can be attributed largely to insufficient contraceptive use.” According to the latest numbers from the United Nations Statistics Division, “unmet need” for contraception in Uganda was 38% in 2006.
Just for the sake of comparison, let’s look at the numbers from the United States: Guttmacher claims that 49% of pregnancies in the US are unintended, yet the UN Statistics Division puts “unmet need” for contraceptives in the US at only 6.6%, as of 2008.
As illustrated by this graph, the Guttmacher Institute’s assumption that more contraception will reduce unintended pregnancy rates in Uganda could stand a bit more scrutiny:
Relationship between “unmet need” for contraceptives and unplanned pregnancies in Uganda and the United States
See the thing people don't take into account is that contraception not only affects fecundity: it changes attitudes and expectations.
If you don't expect to get pregnant from sex, you are more likely to engage in sex and want an abortion after.
If you expect to get pregnant (or at least think it's a decent possibility) then you are more likely to accept it as a consequence and not seek to get an abortion.
That's why the introduction of widespread contraception use always leads to abortion.
We're supposed to believe that before the advent of widespread contraception, abortion was just as prevalent as it is today, and that contraception reduced the need for abortion.
Think about it. We're supposed to believe that 60 years ago, 40 per cent of women had at least one abortion in their reproductive lives.
Come on!
Contraception changed attitudes to make abortion more thinkable and acceptable.
